Prospect Thread XIX

It's not selective memory, Wisp. It's a complete and total ignorance of hockey outside of the Vancouver Canucks. Things seem a lot worse when you think you're the only real team in the league and don't realize there are 29 others.

I was looking at the Blackhawks draft history, and man, it put a lot of things into perspective. Top 10 picks like Barker, Skille, and Beach just flat out busting. They picked top 3 in 2004, made 17 picks total, and generated the same number of (quality) NHL players that we did with 7 picks.

That draft aside, we've been generally very lucky to generate as many NHLers we've had with the volume we've been picking at. If that's a strength and not just dumb luck, think of the bounty we could bring in keeping our picks and acquiring more picks.

Over the past 5 years, retaining picks has been the biggest problem with this team's drafting. If they just hold onto their picks, probabilities will increase. The 2nd round being key.

I think that now that the team isn't expected to be a PT contender, that Gillis will be more reluctant in dealing his picks. Last time I checked it was something like 1:3 for odds of a 1st round pick playing 100 games, 1:5 for a 2nd rounder and 1:7 for a 3rd. Beyond that, odds are relatively similar for the remainder.

Our drafting from 1978-83 in particular was excellent and should have set us up to have a strong squad through the '80s. But poor management just pissed it away.

Any idea what happened to the scouting staff after that time? Or was it a case of a number of them just retiring?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bleach Clean

Over the past 5 years, retaining picks has been the biggest problem with this team's drafting. If they just hold onto their picks, probabilities will increase. The 2nd round being key.

I think Roy was the only 2nd rounder Gillis has dealt away as a rental. Can't count Steve Bernier as he wasn't a rental (just a player that didn't work out as expected; an NHLer, just not one worth dealing two picks for).

I was looking at the Blackhawks draft history, and man, it put a lot of things into perspective. Top 10 picks like Barker, Skille, and Beach just flat out busting. They picked top 3 in 2004, made 17 picks total, and generated the same number of (quality) NHL players that we did with 7 picks.

That draft aside, we've been generally very lucky to generate as many NHLers we've had with the volume we've been picking at. If that's a strength and not just dumb luck, think of the bounty we could bring in keeping our picks and acquiring more picks.

Any idea what happened to the scouting staff after that time? Or was it a case of a number of them just retiring?

I think Roy was the only 2nd rounder Gillis has dealt away as a rental. Can't count Steve Bernier as he wasn't a rental (just a player that didn't work out as expected; an NHLer, just not one worth dealing two picks for).

Several people weighed on Cederholm so far in training camp (if I had been using my head I would have copied and pasted the comments as I found them, but alas, I did not). All but one of the comments are positive; one said he wasn't overly impressive, but someone replied to that as saying he was seen with ice on his foot, and had looked good before then.

I was looking at the Blackhawks draft history, and man, it put a lot of things into perspective. Top 10 picks like Barker, Skille, and Beach just flat out busting. They picked top 3 in 2004, made 17 picks total, and generated the same number of (quality) NHL players that we did with 7 picks.

That draft aside, we've been generally very lucky to generate as many NHLers we've had with the volume we've been picking at. If that's a strength and not just dumb luck, think of the bounty we could bring in keeping our picks and acquiring more picks.

A couple problems that could prevent us to get more picks...

It takes 2 teams to make a trade so in order to get more draft picks... we need to first find a dance partner (not always easy as other teams won't give up an additional pick to move up unless there is someone they really want) or trade away players during the deadline (aka being a seller), which is unlikely to happen (tho possible) this year... actually probably unlikely while the Sedins are still here as i doubt they want to be here for a rebuild so any rebuild likely starts with either them leaving as UFA or being traded

The other problem with moving down is you might lose out on someone you really want... moving down could be the difference between drafting someone like Edler and say Paul Baier (next dman taken in the draft after Edler).

Of course we could stop giving away our picks for rentals during the deadline (as quite often they don't work out all that well...) but the problem with this is the team is located in Vancouver. Every year, it seems like fans, media, etc want MG to get more and more during the deadline (while he only makes a few minor moves). If MG does nothing, everyone would be asking for his head almost instantly (not like they aren't already) so you can almost say he's forced to at least make a move or 2 because of where the team is located. On top of that, the team is generally great during the regular season, so it would look like they might make a run in the playoffs (and did once recently, deadline additions did play a big part in that as it was pretty much the 3rd line for our run in 2011, only successful deadline deals in MG's era it seems).

MG also seems to have the most luck signing under the radar (so to speak, basically not the most hyped) UFA prospects. Examples like Tanev (somewhat hyped but not top 10), Lack (might be the only team interested in him). Sure MG strikes out on them a lot but they are free and only cost a contract slot (sometimes only 2 years) so its a good gamble given our situation right now. He just needs to somehow make the team more attractive (which probably means having roster spots, giving those prospect a guarantee spot, etc) so we actually land some of the not so under the radar prospects.

Anton, well, he looks like a bodybuilder. Huge neck and shoulders. He is physical when he needs to be and skates very well. I didn't notice him rush the puck much but I am certain under this system we will see more of that.

Quote:

I was not overly impressed with Anton Cederholm- he did not look really sharp out there today-

Quote:

[Cederholm] Was walking around with ice on his foot the other night. I think he may have a little tweek or blocked a shot. He was VERY Impressive before that

Quote:

As far as non-roster D-men in camp, I liked Jordan Davies and Brendan Grier (Morrow #42). When they got a chance against our top forwards,They more than held their own. So did Cederholm and Haar

Any idea what happened to the scouting staff after that time? Or was it a case of a number of them just retiring?

In 83 we drafted Cam.
In 84 we rolled the dice on JJ Daigneault at the 10 spot. I'd still say a pretty good pick, that could have been developed better, but he played in almost 1000 NHL games

In 85 we drafted Sandlak in a weak draft. It looked like a great pick even a couple seasons later, so hard to hang that on the scouting staff.
I think Sandlaks problems were mainly in his head. While he didn't have the greatest wheels, what killed him as an NHL'er was that he was too chicken to play the same aggressive game against NHL'ers that made him a success in junior

Sandlak was called up (I think an emergency call up) while still in junior. He got clocked with his head down and suffered a concussion. He seemed to always play afraid after that. The size advantage that he enjoyed against junior kids was not as pronounced in the NHL.

In 86 we started drafting like crap. Guys like Dan Woodley, Jason Herter, Rob Murphy, Polasek etc... Those were dreadful picks. We hit with two picks in that time, but even with poor scouting it's hard to mess up the 2nd pick overall in a good draft (Linden and Nedved)...

Jake Milford more or less retired after the '82 Cup run. When he handed over the reigns to Neale, perhaps things started to slowly unravel. When Neale left and Jack Gordon came on the scene, it became an absolute gong show in Vancouver (see Cam Neely trade).

Although it is a highlight video, I really liked what I saw from Blomstrand, and I remember he showed well in all the games I watched him play in too. His skillset reminds me of a Higgins/Hansen mesh in a 6'2.5 220 body. I was posting on CDC I think about how if he really develops a great offensive game he could be a Viktor Stalberg type player.

I wouldn't be surprised if he's seeing call-ups by the end of this season if he continues to improve.